(If it is preferable that I have one question per post, please say so, here are two.)<br /><br />1. <br />Line 28 reads [face=SPIonic]mh/ nu/ toi ou) xrai/smh| skh=ptron kai\ ste/mma qeoi=o.[/face]<br />I translate this as; "The scepter and wreath of god will most certainly not help you". (I used -most certainly not...- because of the double negative + [face=SPIonic]nu/[/face]).<br />My question is concerning [face=SPIonic]xrai/smh|[/face].It says in the foot note that it is 2nd aor. act. subjunctive. I thought it was the present subjunctive. [face=SPIonic]xraisme/w[/face] has a 1st aor. form [face=SPIonic]e)xrai/smhsa[/face]. I would have guessed that the aorist subjunctive would look like [face=SPIonic]xrai/smhsh|[/face].<br />Where did I go wrong? I may not make a great deal of difference in the translation, but it is good to know.<br /> <br />2.<br />Line 31 reads;" [face=SPIonic]i(sto\n e)poixome/nhn kai\ e)mo\n lexos a)ntio/san.[/face]First I thought that the last word in this line was aor. 3rd. pl. but I could not figure out what the subject would be. Then I thought, maybe it is a neuter participle. Then at least it agrees with [face=SPIonic]le/xos[/face].<br />So I have kind of decided that my second choice is the right one.<br />Now to translate it. "Plying the loom and me...(maybe that is serving the loom and serving me?) approaching the couch.[face=SPIonic]a)ntio/wsan[/face] is aorist , so can it be translated as;" Plying the loom, and after approaching the couch, serving me"?<br />Thanks.<br />

[quote author=Bert de Haan link=board=2;threadid=420;start=0#3261 date=1060473340]<br />(If it is preferable that I have one question per post, please say so, here are two.)<br />[/quote]<br /><br />That might be better in the future. Not a huge matter, though.<br /><br /><br />

<br /><br />Here I would translate [face=SPIonic]mh/[/face] as "lest." I believe English isn't your native language (is that right?), so you may wish to check a dictionary on this. "Lest" isn't much used in modern English, but means something like "for fear that" or "that ... not." <br /><br />This clause follows after the first, "let me not find you, old man, near the hollow ships, either loitering now or coming later, lest the scepter and wreath of god not help you."<br /><br />

<br />My question is concerning [face=SPIonic]xrai/smh|[/face].It says in the foot note that it is 2nd aor. act. subjunctive. I thought it was the present subjunctive. [face=SPIonic]xraisme/w[/face] has a 1st aor. form [face=SPIonic]e)xrai/smhsa[/face]. <br />

<br /><br />Check the vocabulary in the back of the book. There is also a second aorist, [face=SPIonic]e)/xraismon[/face].<br /><br />

<br />2.<br />Line 31 reads;" [face=SPIonic]i(sto\n e)poixome/nhn kai\ e)mo\n lexos a)ntio/wsan.[/face]First I thought that the last word in this line was aor. 3rd. pl. but I could not figure out what the subject would be. Then I thought, maybe it is a neuter participle.<br />

<br /><br />(I corrected the spelling last word in the Homeric quote above).<br /><br />Right idea. It's a present feminine participle, just like [face=SPIonic]e)poixome/nhn[/face]. Check out Section 938, the last line about the participles. The non-distracted nominatives would be [face=SPIonic]a)ntiw=n, a)ntiw=sa, a)ntiw=n[/face].<br /><br />"plying the loom and sharing my bed" (Agamemnon being his customary rude self).<br /><br />I regularly confuse feminine present participles with mystery aorists. Always consider that when you see something you thing is an aorist, but makes no sense.

Hi Bert,<br /><br />Re: [face=SPIonic]xrai/smhsh|[/face] -<br />you didn't go wrong at all. Following the pattern of aorist subjunctive for [face=SPIonic]lu/w[/face] the final epsilon in [face=SPIonic]xraisme/w[/face]<br />is lengthened to an eta. Then follows the sigma, next the personal ending [face=SPIonic]h|[/face] (its own origins a bit murky). This yields your <br />[face=SPIonic]xrai/smhsh|[/face] .<br /><br />All that's left is to discard the sigma that occurs between the two eta-s (cf. Pharr 603) and then to contract the<br />[face=SPIonic]h[/face] + [face=SPIonic]h|[/face] (cf. Pharr 585).<br /><br />Re: [face=SPIonic]a)ntio/wsan[/face] - this is a present participle active fem. acc. singular. The line reads "plying the loom and sharing my bed".<br /><br />The form of this participle comes about by what is called 'assimilation'. It can produce some unfamiliar looking verbs. The word started life as [face=SPIonic]a)ntia/ousan[/face]. The alpha before the 'ou' dipthong becomes an omicron. The diphthong gets changed to an omega.<br /><br />Cordially,<br /><br />Paul<br /><br />

[quote author=Bert de Haan link=board=2;threadid=420;start=0#3261 date=1060473340]<br /><br />1. <br />[face=SPIonic]xrai/smh|[/face].It says in the foot note that it is 2nd aor. act. subjunctive. I thought it was the present subjunctive. [face=SPIonic]xraisme/w[/face]<br />[/quote]<br /><br />It's not my habit to intrude, but...<br />The present of this verb is apparently not attested. The present subjunctive would be [face=SPIonic] xraismh=| < xraisme/-h|[/face]. So here it is 2nd aorist ([face=SPIonic]e)/xraismon[/face]).<br /><br /> <br />

quote; William: <br />I believe English isn't your native language (is that right?)<br /> My native language is Dutch but I have spoken English long enough now that it should not make much difference. <br /><br />quote; William:<br /> Here I would translate [face=SPIonic] mh/ [/face]as "lest." <br />Because it takes me a while to complete one chapter and move on to the next, I lose the story line a bit. I never considered using 'lest', but I took this line as standing on its own.<br />Translating [face=SPIonic]mh/[/face] with lest, leaves [face=SPIonic]ou)[/face] on its own to negate a subjunctive verb. I thought it was only used for the indicative.

quote; Paul:<br />Re: [face=SPIonic] xrai/smhsh| -[/face]<br />you didn't go wrong at all. Following the pattern of aorist subjunctive for [face=SPIonic] lu/w[/face] the final epsilon in [face=SPIonic] xraisme/w[/face]<br />is lengthened to an eta. Then follows the sigma, next the personal ending [face=SPIonic] h|[/face] (its own origins a bit murky). This yields your <br />[face=SPIonic] xrai/smhsh| [/face].<br /><br />All that's left is to discard the sigma that occurs between the two eta-s (cf. Pharr 603) and then to contract the[face=SPIonic] <br />h [/face]+[face=SPIonic] h|[/face] (cf. Pharr 585).<br /><br />In this case, using the 2nd aorist stem or the 1st aorist stem to arrive at the aorist subjunctive 3rd sg gets you at the exact same place or not?

[quote author=Skylax link=board=2;threadid=420;start=0#3307 date=1060509678]<br /> <br />It's not my habit to intrude, but...<br />The present of this verb is apparently not attested. The present subjunctive would be [face=SPIonic] xraismh=| < xraisme/-h|[/face]. So here it is 2nd aorist ([face=SPIonic]e)/xraismon[/face]).<br /><br /> <br /><br />[/quote]<br />It is not considered intruding. <br />Is the only difference the accent?<br />The eta is long in either case is it not?<br />I am not all that confident yet with the rules of accenting so could you explain?<br /><br />

If the present [face=SPIonic]xraisme/w[/face] existed, it would follow the paradigm [face=SPIonic]file/w[/face]. The stem would be [face=SPIonic]xraisme-[/face]. To obtain the 3rd person pres. act. subj., add [face=SPIonic]-h|[/face] to the stem: [face=SPIonic]xraisme/-h|[/face]. After contraction, it gives [face=SPIonic]xraismh=|[/face] like [face=SPIonic]filh=|[/face] (Goodwin, § 492).<br /><br />Now, the stem of 2nd aorist is [face=SPIonic]xraism-[/face], thus subj. [face=SPIonic]xrai/smh|[/face] like [face=SPIonic]lu/h|[/face]. 2nd aorist is conjugated exactly like [face=SPIonic]lu/w[/face]. Only the stem shows that it is an aorist.<br /><br />But the eta of [face=SPIonic]xrai/smh|[/face] is not shorter than the eta of [face=SPIonic]xraismh=|[/face]. All etas are the same.<br /><br />hope this helps.

[quote author=Skylax link=board=2;threadid=420;start=0#3322 date=1060522086]<br />If the present [face=SPIonic]xraisme/w[/face] existed, it would follow the paradigm [face=SPIonic]file/w[/face]. The stem would be [face=SPIonic]xraisme-[/face]. To obtain the 3rd person pres. act. subj., add [face=SPIonic]-h|[/face] to the stem: [face=SPIonic]xraisme/-h|[/face]. After contraction, it gives [face=SPIonic]xraismh=|[/face] like [face=SPIonic]filh=|[/face] (Goodwin, § 492).<br /><br />Now, the stem of 2nd aorist is [face=SPIonic]xraism-[/face], thus subj. [face=SPIonic]xrai/smh|[/face] like [face=SPIonic]lu/h|[/face]. 2nd aorist is conjugated exactly like [face=SPIonic]lu/w[/face]. Only the stem shows that it is an aorist.<br /><br />[/quote]<br /><br />Your derivation is much simpler and much sounder than mine. Very nice indeed. Thank you.<br /><br />Cordially,<br /><br />Paul

[quote author=Bert de Haan link=board=2;threadid=420;start=0#3727 date=1060727623]<br />Can [face=SPIonic]ou)[/face] negate a non-indicative verb?<br />Thanks.<br />[/quote]<br /><br />Sometimes. Homer uses it to negate the subjunctive when that's acting more like a future than an irrealis (not too common, but happens).<br /><br />These two are from a chart in a Greek prose composition book:<br /><br />It seems to be the usual negative when [face=SPIonic]mh/[/face] is used as a conjunction, and in those clauses indicative, optative and subjunctive are all possible.<br /><br />It's used always in the result (then-clause) portion of a conditional sentence, and there it can be with indicative or optative. It appears the if-clause will always take [face=SPIonic]mh/[/face].<br /><br />That's a quick look. Smyth has several large sections on the subtle differences between these two negatives, including sections for where one is used when the other is expected.